TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court defers hearing on writ petitions challenging order on clubbing entities pending CESTAT appeal, emphasizes importance of CESTAT decision.</h1> <h3>M/s. RAJ PLASTICS, D. GUNA SINGH, M/s. A.D.R. Versus AGENCIES THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXERCIES, MADURAI</h3> The Court deferred the hearing of writ petitions challenging the order dated 22.12.2014 regarding clubbing of entities and an individual, pending the ... SSI Exemption - clubbing of clearances - bye-passing the alternative remedy of appeal by directly invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court - principles of natural justice - Held that:- This Court should have the benefit of the order passed by the CESTAT, Chennai in the appeal filed by the ADR Plastics. Therefore, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai is directed to dispose of the appeal No. E/40595/2015 filed by the ADR Agencies against the order in Original No.7 of 2014 dated 22.12.2014 passed by the respondent herein on merits and in accordance with law on or before 31.03.2019. The status quo that obtains as on date shall continue till final orders are passed in this writ petition. Issues:Challenging order dated 22.12.2014 regarding clubbing of entities and an individual, violation of principles of natural justice, bypassing appeal for writ jurisdiction, binding effect of CESTAT's decision on writ petitions, direction for CESTAT to dispose of appeal by 31.03.2019, maintenance of status quo.Analysis:The writ petitions were filed to challenge the order dated 22.12.2014 passed against three entities and an individual regarding clubbing. One entity had already filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai, which was still pending. The petitioners argued a violation of natural justice, prompting them to directly seek writ jurisdiction. The Court noted that the appeal before CESTAT was ongoing and decided to defer the hearing of the writ petitions until the appeal was resolved. The Court emphasized that the CESTAT's decision would be crucial for the writ petitions, even if the appeal was dismissed, as the petitioners could independently pursue the writ petitions based on their merits.The Court directed CESTAT, Chennai to dispose of the pending appeal by a specified date, ensuring a decision on the matter by 31.03.2019. It was deemed essential for the Court to have the benefit of CESTAT's decision before proceeding with the writ petitions. Both parties were granted the liberty to approach the roster Judge post the CESTAT's decision. Additionally, the Court ordered the maintenance of the status quo until final orders were issued in the writ petition, ensuring the current situation remained unchanged during the legal proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
